This contribution analyses sentence n. 32971/2022 through an examination of the widely debated legal and jurisprudential framework that has developed over the years. The Court of Cassation, in particular, returns to revisiting the issue of the burden of proof in the matter of medical liability, recalling the distinction between material and legal causality and emphasising the instrumental nature of the interest of the obligations of professional duty. In fact, the violation of the leges artis does not automatically lead to the violation of the presupposed interest (the patient’s health), which could be unsatisfied for autonomous causes other than the violation of the professional duty.
Il presente contributo analizza la sentenza n. 32971/2022 attraverso una disamina del quadro normativo e giurisprudenziale, ampiamente dibattuto, formatosi negli anni. La Corte di Cassazione, in particolare, torna a fare il punto sul tema dell’onere probatorio in materia di responsabilità sanitaria, richiamando la distinzione tra causalità materiale e giuridica e sottolineando la natura strumentale dell’interesse delle obbligazioni di facere professionale. Difatti, dalla violazione della leges artis non discende automaticamente la violazione dell’interesse presupposto (la salute del paziente), che potrebbe risultare insoddisfatto per cause autonome e diverse dall’inadempimento della prestazione professionale.
La ripartizione degli oneri probatori in capo alle parti nel giudizio per responsabilità sanitaria
Vittoria Caponecchia
2023-01-01
Abstract
This contribution analyses sentence n. 32971/2022 through an examination of the widely debated legal and jurisprudential framework that has developed over the years. The Court of Cassation, in particular, returns to revisiting the issue of the burden of proof in the matter of medical liability, recalling the distinction between material and legal causality and emphasising the instrumental nature of the interest of the obligations of professional duty. In fact, the violation of the leges artis does not automatically lead to the violation of the presupposed interest (the patient’s health), which could be unsatisfied for autonomous causes other than the violation of the professional duty.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


